I will debate any atheist on here
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-03-2015, 09:14 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(01-03-2015 06:08 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  What you just said there makes no difference. WTF is Causual existence? That doesn't even make any sence. You just made that up!

Actually, I didn't.

If a man has been sitting perfectly still in a chair for eternity, having never moved, there was no moments leading to him sitting, and there is no moments AFTER he sat...time simply doesn't exist.

If the man begins to stand up, there was no TEMPORAL cause which lead to his standing, but since the man caused himself to stand, even if it wasn't at a preceding temporal point, the man is still a "causal" cause.

So the man had a "causal" existence in the sense that he existed due to the necessity of his own nature. The man existed, even though he didn't exist in a POINT in time.

Now, this concept is conceivable, but what ISN'T conceivable is the idea that time has existed for eternity. That ISN'T conceivable...so since it isn't even conceivable, then it can't happen in reality...so therefore we can dismiss it as absurd.

(01-03-2015 06:08 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  Evidence based on a subjective thing such as your perception of evidence does not quality as actual evidence to assert your beliefs as truth. Evidence is objective, not subjective.

Um, it is not subjective...time cannot be extended to past eternity, and this can be demonstrated. So if time itself had a beginning, then whatever gave it its beginning could not itself be in time..and the only thing entity in the vocabulary of man that can exist outside of time is....GOD.

(01-03-2015 06:08 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  We can test evidence, we can test the evidence left behind as a result of X factor or Y event happening.

Test what evidence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2015, 09:17 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Science hasn't answered every question yet. It might not be able to. However it's done a shitload more than your supposed god has. Evidence is useful, belief in a sky daddy does nothing more than give you an excuse to dismiss evidence without actually thinking about it.

Well, until science can answer the specific questions that I have, then I will stick with my theism, thank you.

(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  You do realize that you're a joke around here, right?

Most Christians are.

(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Actually your type of thinking about reality has been a joke in much of the modern world for quite some time now. I know, it'll all be better for you once Jesus comes, and we'll all be proven wrong. You keep holding on to that shtick, the rest of us will do our best to become better as a species (or "kind" Rolleyes ) despite the residual drag that you insist on putting us through.

Oh, and Jesus definitely be here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2015, 09:18 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Laugh out load
Laugh all you want, your kind is dying off more and more every year.

(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Use whatever biological term you want, and you still haven't seen a reptile-bird transformation
Except that I have, as I explained earlier. does not have to happen in real time for me to see that it happened. Your ignorance of the information, does not stop me from knowing it nor is it an argument.


(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  ..so see, asshole...it isn't about the term you use
Actually terminology is very important. When two people are arguing and one person is using clearly recognized language with clear meaning and descriptive power and the other one is pulling random words out of a fucking story book and can't even define the words he is using then it's gonna be hard to come to any kinda cross roads because one is saddled with the need to make fucking sense and the other is free to make up what ever bullshit he needs to win an argument.

If we can use whatever terminology we want (and refuse define it) we can argue anything we want. It's a dishonest, uneducated, and stupid way of communicating. The fact you have no real education in biology ain't an excuse to make up what ever terms you need to fill that gap.


(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  it is about the reality of shit.
And you belief does not comport to demonstrable reality. Your gods a fiction cuntcake. So matter how much you believe it, the origins of that particular myth are well known. Just makes you a sucker is all.

(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Somebody tell Captain Dumbass here that whether or not a bat is a bird is dependent upon animal classification...and if the ancient ones called bats birds, then bats were birds to them.
[Image: missedthepoint.jpg]

Damn it's like they couldn't figure out what a "Kind" was. Rolleyes 4 year olds must of written the Bible eh?

(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Yeah, but the interpretation of what the change represents is in the eye of the beholder, dumbass.
The findings and "interpretations" go through peer-review and if they don't hold up to the evidence they get discarded. You can present whatever interpretation you want but other scientists are gonna go over your interpretation and they are gonna savage it and try and find anyway that it does not comport to reality. That's just for stuff that has room for interpretation, DNA for example really does not.
Your grasping at fucking straws.
Maybe Satan did it. Or maybe the boogeyman did it? That's right I bet it was the fucking boogeyman.
[Image: tumblr_ndg9op7s0Q1qcjzvuo1_500.gif]

(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  If you haven't seen a reptile to bird type transformation.....
Good thing I have then eh?Drinking Beverage

(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  And you have it in your head....
Deleted for the use of made up words. Keep doing that though, really saves me time. Also you in no way addressed the actual point I was making. So good job I guess.

(01-03-2015 08:36 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  And on the above note, I will go ahead and stop it right there. I told you, shorter and shorter Big Grin
And stupider and stupider. I see you chose to leave in your special brand of bullshit. Man..it's like I called it ahead of time. Rolleyes

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
01-03-2015, 09:33 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(01-03-2015 08:46 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Macroevolution IS the presupposition. Just like these people keep saying, "small changes lead to big changes"...that is a presupposition.
No you idiot that's basic fucking math. 1+1= a bigger number then 1. Now do it a million fucking times and tell me if the number you get is not bigger then 1.

(01-03-2015 08:46 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  but to think that there can be these large scale reptile-bird kind of transformations, you have to PRESUPPOSE that those kind of changes can occur, despite all observational evidence to the contrary.
(01-03-2015 08:46 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  So if you start with the presupposition that reptiles turned in to birds, then you will interpret things like the archeo as a transitional fossil from a reptile to a bird..in that case, the presupposition comes first, and the conclusion comes next.
Well this is just flat wrong historically even. For years the long standing theory was that the dinosaurs went extinct. The "presupposition", if you want to call it that, was just that: extinction. Then we found evidence that this was not the case for every dinosaur species, that some had evolved into birds, and we amended the theory. We did not start with the idea reptiles turned into birds and then went looking for information, the exact opposite actually.

You don't even have the history right, your just making up shit on the fly to defend your incorrect opinion. Honestly do you ever actually look up ANYTHING you say before you say it? Shit.

(01-03-2015 08:46 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Science works? Can science show where morality came from? Or explain the origins of consciousness, life, and the universe?
Oh look your making the old "Science does not have answers to every question there is right at this moment so therefore it does not work." argument. How ...pedestrian. I'll tell you what does not have answers and never will have the answers to those questions: The Bible.
Because claims and assertions aren't answers.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
01-03-2015, 09:36 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
Quote:Well, until science can answer the specific questions that I have, then I will stick with my theism, thank you.

Why are you here then?
It appears nothing anyone here could say contrary to your beliefs will penetrate your thick skull.
You stick with what you have and someone will give you a call as soon as possible.
Thanks for playing. Have a nice day.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2015, 09:37 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  And the "evidence" for evolution has come across my desk enough times for me to reject it.
You lie with such regularity you would make a lawyer ashamed.

(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Maybe it can, maybe it can't...I am saying that so far, based on the evidence that has been presented to me, I have no reasons to think that it DID...and I even have evidence to the contrary.
More lying.

(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  So I think that the evidence FOR evolution sucks, plus I have evidence against it...so when I add those two together, I get disbelief.
More lying.

(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Well, as I said before, the evidence for intelligent design is overwhelming, in my onion...and the evidence for evolution is underwhelming.
And more lying.

Fan-fucking-tastic.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2015, 09:42 PM
I will debate any atheist on here
Uh, what is this evidence that supports intelligent design, is it the bible?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2015, 09:43 PM (This post was last modified: 02-03-2015 04:50 PM by WhiskeyDebates.)
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
(01-03-2015 09:17 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Well, until science can answer the specific questions that I have, then I will stick with my theism, thank you.
Sp basically your whole view on the world is one giant god of the gaps. That's fucking hilarious.Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Most Christians are.
Not really actually. We have had numerous Christians on the forum over the years who were and are still very well thought of. KingsChosen has one of the higher reputations of any member and he's Christian.

You're not a joke because you are a Christian, you're a joke because your mind numbingly stupid. Unless you think there ain't much of a difference between the two. Laughat

(01-03-2015 09:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Oh, and Jesus definitely be here.
Rolleyes
Based on how the Jesus of the Bible tells you to act, he probably thinks you're a cunt. Drinking Beverage

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
01-03-2015, 09:53 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
OK. Serious questions.

Not questions for Call_of_Nature but about him.:

Assuming he's not a Poe...

1. How does this kinda (not 'kind', 'kind of') thinking come about?
1a. Is it from tradition / culture?
1b. Is it about poor education (state/family)?
1c. Is it a geographic phenomena (i.e. a specifically Murikan version of the meme)?
1d. Is it a medical condition?

2. Is there a remedy?
(I'm particularly looking for insight from anyone here who may have previously suffered from the same delusions)
2a. Would KC's 'softly, softly' approach have proved more productive?
2b. The abrasive, fact-chucking approach seems to be making the delusion stronger; reacting like a cornered animal. Should we treat these cases like they have been infected with a virus that morphs (evolves) in order to survive attack from our antibiotics (evidence, reason, logic)?
2c. If there is no cure, what is the best solution to ensure that the infection does not spread to other innocent victims?

I'm honestly curious as to the best way to deal with this level of ignorance.

What does the panel think?

Huh

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
01-03-2015, 09:57 PM
RE: I will debate any atheist on here
Quote:Actually, I didn't.

If a man has been sitting perfectly still in a chair for eternity, having never moved, there was no moments leading to him sitting, and there is no moments AFTER he sat...time simply doesn't exist.

If the man begins to stand up, there was no TEMPORAL cause which lead to his standing, but since the man caused himself to stand, even if it wasn't at a preceding temporal point, the man is still a "causal" cause.

So the man had a "causal" existence in the sense that he existed due to the necessity of his own nature. The man existed, even though he didn't exist in a POINT in time.

Now, this concept is conceivable, but what ISN'T conceivable is the idea that time has existed for eternity. That ISN'T conceivable...so since it isn't even conceivable, then it can't happen in reality...so therefore we can dismiss it as absurd.

You are still spouting casual and temporal like they are established words that mean something.

You are just spouting the same unmoved mover bull shit non sense that has been debunked by many people for many generations.

Quote:Um, it is not subjective...time cannot be extended to past eternity, and this can be demonstrated. So if time itself had a beginning, then whatever gave it its beginning could not itself be in time..and the only thing entity in the vocabulary of man that can exist outside of time is....GOD.

Prove it! Prove GOD is the only possible conclusion for something that can still exist, even though time and space does not exist. Then, I need you to prove that YOUR god is the only possible god that can exist outside of time and space. THEN you need to prove that god actually exists.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: